庶伏竒蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕

Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
庶伏竒蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕
Wai Kam YU 廻題檬*
Abstract
This paper is concerned with the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare, which is an
understudied area. It is intended to examine two different views on this bias through studying the similarities of the
welfare-to-work measures in Hong Kong and the UK. The irst view is indebted to the studies intended to increase the
cultural sensitivity of social and human services through challenging the assumption of the universal applicability of
Eurocentric knowledge. It stresses that the bias can be caused by the over-emphasis on the similarities between the
insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ in organizing and assessing social welfare. As discussed in more
detail in the paper, the insiders refer to a small number of western industrialized or capitalist countries, which are
particularly associated with advanced capitalism and membership of the Organization of Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) . The outsiders refer to those countries which do not uphold the non-capitalist regimes
or belong to the OECD. The second view is indebted to the studies of welfare regimes. It stresses that the bias can
be caused by the under-emphasis on the similarities between the insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ in
organizing and assessing social welfare. Discussing these two views enhances our understanding of different possibilities that the outsiders of ‘welfare state club’ organise social welfare in response to different sources of knowledge.
Keywords: Ethnocentric Bias, Welfare to Work Measures
唹
獣
位τ応鋭則拿威弟ムν語択亀奄峨鋭垰海Ё兩遮祈ム埴淘 覇抔皙兩δ彊京垰海Ё兩遮祈語
竈鹸 位τ語殉猥暫Ы庶伏竒蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕爾灸ナ 追則渠埆呶威弟ムν語択亀語煮
舷 萄ゑ埆煮舷暫淋傑竈鹸奄峨巓н交竜兼凧呶τΜ語呈裸崎語遮祈 覇休遮祈ゑ曳姊キ燦暝Ы恠
視τΜ爾ムν語乞禮ы沽胃傑臼У悉語台粘 萄ゑ埆煮舷慧帖抻 威弟ムν語択亀語汚穎暫冩迂傚
トゑ休濡嫣爾暫垰海胆鏡ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆鋭氷泣鏡亦我垰海酢語渦波猥 奄ヶτ慧熟 華
χビ侶鏡儂位Ч亢胆状ゑ操濡嫣玖暫垰海胆状 戴黄ャ葦語胆状惚謁濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆状 萄ゥ埆
煮舷惚傘к威弟ムν語択亀暫淋傑冩迂傚ト濡嫣爾垰海胆状鏡貢垰海胆状語ミ餌ャ匂 Ы愁貢垰
海胆状濡柾爾呶Ч詩語垰海Ё兩圭遮祈В楚巽可嵜鋤 則拿覇渠夜煮舷 茶殴絵イ偐橘休濡嫣爾
貢垰海胆状奄峨匂盗ミ餌球淋語乞禮Ы穂埴交竜垰海
竈爼延 威弟ムν語択亀 懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕
Wai Kam Yu, Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Hong Kong Baptist University.
廻題檬
庶伏星竜ト晝交竜ビ会晝季諾偵鍔
Email:[email protected]
88
廻題檬
Introduction
The publication of the essay ‘Rethinking the Western Construction of the Welfare State’ (Walker and Wong, 1996) has been
followed by enthusiastic discussions of the ethnocentric bias
in the comparative study of social welfare in both the East and
the West (Kennett, 2001; Walker and Wong, 2005; Hill, 2006;
Chau and Yu, 2009; Wong, 2009) . Alan Walker and Chackkie Wong, the essay’s authors, develop their argument based on
their observation that many of the countries of the Asian Paciic
area (such as Hong Kong and Singapore) are not given a welfare
state status (and are thus regarded as the outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’) , not because of their institutions of welfare, but
because of a lack of those institutions (such as capitalist economy
and parliamentary democracy) which are not directly associated
with the welfare state. Based on this observation, they argue that
the ethnocentric bias can be caused by the under-emphasis on
the similarities between the insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare
state club’ in organising and assessing social welfare.
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
捻
架Walker鏡СЗ (1996) мк
語埼喩
ゑτ
Φ索華χ垰海胆
閤紬袖イ呶威弟ムν語択亀廂縵堅
華χ垰海Ё兩遮祈語悍静則拿 (Kennett, 2001; Walker
and Wong, 2005; Hill, 2006; Chau and Yu, 2009;
暖傑呶及α奪胆状語遮祈
Wong, 2009)
СЗ嫣爾削謁及α奪語胆状
海胆
Walker鏡
背翫殴濡愃玖爾暫垰
許樵穎逆ミ鋭傑位疑語垰海始喩
嘉暫穎爾
Я勝楚Щゑ休竒垰海胆逆翫殴醐鎚竈轟語ヴ禅
儂位Ч亢亂淦胥季鏡威Ч籀竜胥侠抱
奄
Я勝嫣爾冩
迂傚ト垰海胆鏡貢垰海胆語ミ餌ャ匂竜痘緯威弟ム
ν語択亀
位τ応鋭俾еWalker 鏡СЗ呶威弟ムν語択亀
This paper is intended to contribute to Walker and Wong’s analysis
of the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare by
carrying out two analytical tasks. The irst is to discuss those studies
intended to increase the cultural sensitivity of social and human services
through challenging the assumption of the universal applicability of
Eurocentric knowledge. These studies lend support to a different view
on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare. As
shown later in this paper, this view stresses that the bias is caused by the
over-emphasis on the similarities between the insiders and outsiders of
the ‘welfare state club’ in organizing and assessing social welfare.
The second analytical task is to provide evidence to illustrate the
importance of the two views on the ethnocentric bias especially in
raising our awareness of the fact that how the outsiders of the ‘welfare
state club’ organise and assess social welfare is open to more than one
possibility. This is done by discussing two issues surrounding measures
for ‘helping’ welfare users (by stick and carrot)to work in Hong Kong
and the UK. As seen later in this paper, Walker and Wong (2004)point
out that Hong Kong is commonly regarded as the outsider of the ‘welfare
state club’ whereas the UK the insider of the ‘welfare state club’. The
irst issue is that the ways the Hong Kong government designs and promotes welfare to work measures are indebted to the ideas of the New
Deal Programmes in the UK. The second issue is concerned with the
double-connection strategy used by the Hong Kong government in developing and promoting its welfare to work measures. At the same time
as borrowing ideas from the UK, it justiies the value of the measures
by stressing the traditional Chinese values.
語煮舷
許殉猥隙傑渠夜Ζ研ビ会
会暫則拿殴竈奄峨巓н交竜兼凧呶τΜ呈裸崎語遮
祈
奄ヶτ慧熟
殴晦傑Walker鏡СЗ語臘猥
覇
休遮祈嫣爾冩迂傚ト垰海胆鏡貢垰海胆語渦波猥暫
俳汚威弟ムν語択亀
萄ゥ夜Ζ研ビ会暫獣傘к則拿呶威弟ムν語
択亀語ミ餌煮舷
殴絵喚勝イ偐貢垰海胆奄峨
潰胃謁ヴΜχ舷
氷泣垰海兼凧
位τ茶Ы庶
伏鏡蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕
則拿赦竈臘
猥
位τΖ爾ゲ嘗盃迂
ν語択亀語渠埆煮舷
語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕
萄ゑ盃迂則拿呶威弟ム
萄ゥ盃迂則拿庶伏鏡蹴胆
萄ゲ盃迂惚腱羃向イ偐
殴竈威弟ムν語択亀語則拿呶垰海Ё兩遮祈猪球
失峺語貞壱
鋭盲埴赦竈則拿ャ腰
俾е儂笥
The paper is organized into three main parts. It starts by
examining the two different views on the ethnocentric bias in the
comparative studies of social welfare. This is followed by the
萄ゑ夜Ζ研ビ
萄ゑ
位τ氷泣奄コゲ夜
垰海胆鏡貢垰海胆覇渠嘗両
軍 暫 球 架 Walker鏡 С З 語 τ ( Walker and Wong,
1996; 2004)
垰海胆暫傘ゑ休華χビ侶鏡儂位
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
discussion of the above two issues. The third analyses the implications of the discussion of these measures on the examination
of ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare.
Ч亢胆状
萄1夫
扱 勝 ト 盃 迂 柴 暫 OECD語 汚 笑 胆
胆閤暫垰海胆語灸ナ
華χ胆状
Before going into the details of the analytical tasks, it is necessary
to clarify three points. The irst is concerned with the signiicance
of the ideas of the insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’.
These ideas come from Walker and Wong’s articles (Walker and
Wong, 1996; 2004). The insiders refer to a small number of western
industrialized or capitalist countries, which are particularly associated
with advanced capitalism and membership of the Organization of
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The outsiders refer to those countries which do not uphold the non-capitalist regimes
or belong to the OECD. According to Walker and Wong (1996), their
welfare systems are usually excluded from the mainstream comparative welfare state literature. Since most of the insiders of the ‘welfare
state club’, such as the UK, Germany and Sweden, are those commonly seen as ‘western’ countries, and most of the outsiders of the
‘welfare state club’, such as China and Singapore, are those commonly seen as ‘non-western countries’, comparing how the insiders and
outsiders of the ‘welfare state’ organise social welfare can enhance
our understanding of the ethnocentric bias in favour of the West in the
comparative study of social welfare. For this reason, this paper takes
up this analytical task with the focus on the UK and Hong Kong.
萄1叫
蹴
ト盃迂貢垰海胆惚球架貢
庶伏閤暫許ム語灸ナ
З (1996) 傘к
89
Wa l k e r 鏡 С
貢垰海胆語垰海侠崎波瀦濡Ч
詩語垰海Ё兩遮祈慧群柾
廃冩Ё兩貢垰海胆竒
垰海胆語交竜垰海
殴絵喚勝イ偐威弟ムν語択
亀
暖傑覇嘗樵穎
位τ茶紋ムЫ蹴胆鏡庶伏爾
灸
会Ζ研遮祈
萄ゥ
ゑ操垰海Ё兩遮祈姊殉Ё兩ミ餌詠奪語
交竜垰海侠崎語筒餌
休Ё兩ビ会
位τ語殉猥逆ミ鋭傑匂盗覇
嘉暫廃冩遮祈サ熟語渠夜獣猥
監謁呶威弟ムν語択亀語則拿
μ袖
位τ橦曖Ы庶伏鏡
蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕爾灸ナ渦殴渠ト樵穎
萄ゑ
狆閉蹴胆暫ゑ嘗華χ胆状逆濡柾爾垰海胆
嘉庶伏惚嘩傑堅χ逆濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆
駕渠詠
語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕困殴燃謁赦餌ャ匂
萄ゥ
斃埣庶伏産轡語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕竒蹴胆語垰海
Secondly, comparative studies of social welfare are usually concerned
with similarities and differences in the ways in which social welfare in
different locations is assessed and formulated. Evidently, this paper is not
intended to provide a comprehensive analysis of comparative studies of
social welfare. Rather, its intention is to show how the study of the above
two issues contributes to ongoing discussions of ethnocentric bias in the
comparative studies of social welfare. It is also important to point out
the reasons for focusing on the welfare to work measures in Hong Kong
and the UK. Firstly despite the fact that the UK is a western country and
commonly regarded as a member of the ‘welfare state club’ whereas
Hong Kong is located in the East and commonly regarded as an outsider
of the ‘welfare state club’, the welfare to work measures in the UK and
Hong Kong have important similarities. Secondly, despite the similarities
of its welfare to work measures with those in the UK, the Hong Kong
government is keen to show the link of these measures to traditional Chinese values rather than western values. The details of these two reasons
will be discussed in the later parts of the paper. Since the paper intends
to discuss the welfare to work measures mainly as examples to illustrate
the two views on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of
social welfare, it does not provide in-depth analysis of these measures. If
readers want to have a deeper understanding of these measures, they are
advised to read other literature (such as Grover and Stewart, 1999; Millar,
2000; Clasen and Clegg, 2003; De Giorgi, 2005; Social Welfare Department, 2006a ; Tang and Cheung, 2007; Yu, 2008).
Thirdly, the Labour Party is no longer the ruling party in the UK.
However, the policy measures designed by it and the ideas associat-
栂蚕貢瀦赦餓
駕庶伏産轡ヰ閉愁キ患油督語ム胆
嵜鋤臘軍竒許垰海栂蚕ヨ赦墸甥
イ偐殴竈呶威弟ムν語択亀
覇渠猥殴絵 喚勝
謂傑位τ応鋭Ы懲
垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕会爾則拿威弟ムν語択亀語灸
ナ
慧Ы位τ呶覇休栂蚕逆ミ竜会砥エ語追則
舟羃向鉄イ偐謁休覇休栂蚕
τ箒
ы巽擅許Я赦竈語
奄Grover and Stewart (1999) , Millar (2000) ,
Clasen鏡Clegg (2003) , De Giorgi (2005) , Social
Welfare Department (2006a) , Tang鏡Cheung (2007) Υ
Yu (2008)
萄ゲ
蹴胆ビ糯淘鋭狆閉逆貢男産糯
語産捧Υ赦竈盗軍
贈潸囹々叛鬨ボ
駕許侠玖
ヰ閉呶喚勝語遮祈虚巽可嵜鋤
鬨易︰鵤默
Wa l k e r 鏡 С З ( 1 9 9 6 ) 嫣 爾 ゑ 操 呶 垰 海 竒 垰 海
胆語盗偐
赫彊華χ慂苑 (western paradigm) 廂
縵 (Kennett, 2001)
Я勝傘к垰海胥侠語Ζ竊ビ会
90
廻題檬
ed with the measures still provide important cases for us to examine
the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare.
Two views on the ethnocentric bias in the
comparative study of social welfare
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
謁暫巽可儂位Ч亢威Ч胆状語亂肬
謁暫OECD語汚笑
垰海胆状フ濡埼喩汚爾儂位Ч亢威Ч胥侠語ゑ盃
迂
扱弧濡埔爾
位Ч亢拿
Walker and Wong (1996) start discussing the ethnocentric bias
in the comparative studies of social welfare by arguing that the
way in which welfare and the welfare state have been socially
constructed indicates the dominance of a ‘western paradigm’
permeating deinitions and theory in ‘ethnocentric western social
research’ (Kennett, 2001) . They point out that the classiication
of welfare regimes has tended to focus on advanced capitalist
parliamentary democracies which are members of the OECD:
Welfare states have been constructed as a capitalist-democratic project:
they are commonly referred to as ‘welfare capitalist states’ or ‘welfare
capitalism’. Those societies without either one or both of the supposed
core institutions – a capitalist economy and a western parliamentary
democracy – are effectively excluded from what is an exclusive club of
mainly OECD members that are labeled, both popularly and scientifically, ‘welfare states’ (Walker and Wong, 1996: 69).
嘉覇休胆状ケ
垰海儂位Ч亢胆
形
垰海儂
橘休逆貢呷茄儂位Ч亢亂淦Υ形華
χ籀竜威Ч胥侠語胆状
惚竜濡嫣玖爾暫貢垰海
胆状 (Walker 鏡 Wong, 1996: 69)
Walker鏡СЗμ胃庶伏会爾灸ナ
Я勝傘к庶
伏鋭Ё兩圭遮祈ム逆翫殴瑩措爾垰海胆
穎逆ミ暫産轡呶交竜垰海語憩曩ミ犠
В楚籀竜威Ч胥侠
瘡渤兼凧
ィ艶戒箕偵軌
抱抱語垰海兼凧
貢垰海胆
Я勝ケ傘к
Ч獣樵
嘉暫謂傑
庶伏氷泣臼威
ト熱忻Γ渦恵罪重匸
潯閉奄黄
庶伏亂瀦濡悉玖爾
祈許樵穎暫庶伏語産己胥侠竒華χ産
己威Ч胥侠殴削ト語ミ餌 (Walker 鏡 Wong, 2004:
124)
To substantiate their claims, they use Hong Kong as an
example. According to their views, Hong Kong is not given a
welfare state status in comparative studies, not because of the
government’s commitment to social welfare, but due to its lack
of a parliamentary democratic institution. They point out:
……Hong Kong has universal health services, universal and free
basic education, extensive public housing programmes…..all these
relect the ‘basic modicum’ of welfare found in liberal welfare states.
However, it is usually excluded from the ‘club’ of welfare states because it does not have one of the two essential institutional criteria – a
Western-style political democracy – despite the fact that it is the freest
economy on earth’ (Walker and Wong, 2004: 124).
In view of the example of Hong Kong, it is not surprising to
see that Walker and Wong (2004: 118) argue this:
…..the Western welfare state paradigm is an ethnocentric construction. Their (Countries’)exclusion is not based on the policy
content or institutions of welfare in those countries, but on other
institutional requirements that are not concerned with the welfare
state per se but rather its cultural, economic and political context.
In order to tackle the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies
of social welfare, Walker and Wong (1996)stress the importance of
raising our awareness of the similarities of the ways in which social
welfare is organized and assessed in different societies. Moreover
they draw attention to the possibility that many outsiders of the
‘welfare state club’ may face similar economic and political chal-
除羣傑庶伏覇嘗灸ナ
Wa l k e r 鏡 С З ( 2 0 0 4 :
118) 傘к
華χ垰海胆暫謂威弟ムν拿埼喩語
嫣玖爾暫貢垰海胆語 (胆状)
ヶ譲形暫垰海始喩
ゑ休濡
逆ミ暫暖傑許蚕産
嘉暫許Я竒垰海胆ミ赦竈語
始喩哲右
爾イ盗偐威弟ムν語択亀
Wa l k e r 鏡 С
З (1996) 帖抻喚勝沽碩羅ゑ休濡嫣爾暫垰海胆鏡
ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆語赦餌猥
黄葦
喚勝沽鹸
羅蔽拿暫濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆形垰海胆語胆状
奏巡呶赦餌語亂淦Υ産己燦暝
セы
覇休燦暝語許ムゑ
嘗殉獣灸ナ暫交竜垰海竒絢般亂淦語郁社竈轟
奄交竜垰海ыЫ帖Μ肌只キ嘘緯
鴻盟気淮仇侶語淮册
会羅鉄
閉嘉
交
奄弗塊ビウ語ビ
巓н緯痘汚位抱 (Gough, 1979; Walker鏡
Wong, 2009)
社陣沽
擠暁交竜碵玖
Ы帖Μ絢般亂淦
竜垰海困ケ爾絢般枉侠猪球燦暝
灸
爾イ頴沽交竜垰海呶絢般亂淦語郁
削謁産轡 (п撒橘休濡嫣爾暫垰海胆竒濡
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
lenges as the insiders, shaped increasingly by economic globalization. An important example of these challenges is the contradictory
relationship between social welfare and market economy – that is
that the provision of social welfare serves to strengthen the market economy by reproducing labour, securing social stability and
providing contracts for the private sector to make proits on the one
hand, and it challenges market mechanism by reducing workers’
incentive to work and increasing the inancial costs of production
on the other hand (Gough, 1979; Wong and Walker, 2009). In response to these mixed effects of social welfare on market economy,
many governments (both the insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare
state club’)ind it necessary to carry out double tasks – that is, at
the same time as providing social welfare, they attempt to reduce
the negative effects of social welfare on market mechanism (Offe,
1984; Chau and Yu, 2009). For example, in order to reduce the
negative effects of social security measures on people’s incentive to
work, many governments require users of social security measures
to join job skills training programmes and actively seek jobs (Heron
and Dwyer, 1999; Prideaux, 2001).
Walker and Wong’s argument is not the only view on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare. There is
an alternative one that stresses the importance of paying heed to the
differences between the outsiders and insiders of ‘welfare state club’
in organising and assessing social welfare (Yu, 2008). Such a view is
indebted to those studies intended to increase the cultural sensitivity
of social welfare through making challenges to two related assumptions on Eurocentric knowledge (Schiele, 2000; Payne, 2005; Chau
and Yu, 2010). The irst of these two assumptions is that Eurocentric
knowledge can be universally applied to other cultural groups. The
second is that ‘one theory, worldview or paradigm can be used to
explain human behavior among all people and in every culture’ (Graham, 1999: 254). Obviously these two assumptions provide support
to the suppression of many cultural groups’ experiences, value, ideas
and interpretations about the causes of social problems, and the role
of social welfare in tackling social problems (Schiele, 2000; Payne,
2005). It could be said that these two assumptions also negate the
importance of the attempts of many governments (such as those of
the non-members of the OECD and outsiders of the ‘welfare state
clubs’)to provide social welfare based on indigenous knowledge.
However, studies show that the importance of Eurocentric knowledge in moulding the development of social welfare in societies
across the world is over-exaggerated (Cheung and Liu, 2004; Chau
and Yu, 2010). Firstly the problems of relying too much on Eurocentric knowledge in the provision of social welfare are revealed in a
number of studies. For example analysts (such as Atal, 1981; Huang
and Zhang, 2008)argue that the third world suffer both political and
academic colonialism because social sciences, like colonialism and
capitalism, are implanted from the West to the colonies to help secure
and perpetuate western power. Holliday (2000)argues that welfare
arrangements in capitalist East Asia (such as Japan, Hong Kong and
萄1叫
萄1夫
嫣爾暫貢垰海胆) 嫣爾殴孱獣幗茄癶殉宇凧
暫櫓氷泣交竜垰海語餌酢
91
覇披
扱勝凖偬弗δ交竜垰
海呶絢般枉侠語宿巡廂縵 (Offe, 1984; Chau鏡Yu,
2009)
灸奄
爾イ弗δ交竜高屎栂蚕呶ウ勝ビ会
羅鉄語宿巡廂縵
削謁産轡赫獣間交竜高屎彊絵向
巽竒ビ会官奏談測重匸Υ梍亮批慣ビ会 (Heron and
Dwyer, 1999; Prideaux, 2001)
ミδ晝向因巽竒殴竈威弟ムν択亀語則拿
許 則 拿 殴 晦 傑 Wa l k e r 鏡 С З 語 臘 猥
Я勝帖抻
沽鹸柾ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆竒濡嫣爾暫垰海胆
語 ミ 餌 ャ 匂 ( Yu , 2 0 0 8 )
覇埆煮舷暫淋傑巓н
交竜兼凧呶τΜ語呈裸崎語遮祈
覇休遮祈ゑ
曳姊キ燦暝渠嘗Ы恠視τΜ爾ムν語乞禮胥季
語台粘 (Schiele, 2000; Payne, 2005; Chau鏡Yu,
2010)
萄ゑ
Ы恠視τΜ爾ムν語乞禮暫ыЫ
沽胃傑許Я胆状
萄ゥ
ゑ嘗盗拿 (形慂灸) ы
Ы偐粢慧殴ウ語茄爾鏡ミ餌τΜ (Graham, 1999:
254)
訣肓詠覇渠嘗台粘汕侠イミ餌τΜ語亂肬
鏡嵜鋤臘軍
交竜垰海匂盗交竜坦皙語偽稼抱語
ミ餌盗偐鏡噎磅 (Schiele, 2000; Payne, 2005)
覇渠嘗台粘因害玖イ削謁産轡 (п撒ゑ休濡嫣爾暫
貢垰海胆形貢OECD汚笑胆) 急苓位ヅ乞禮球侠玖
許垰海産捧語殉獣圭
殴遮祈肓壱
恠視τΜ爾ムν語乞禮語巽可
嵜鋤暫濡冩迂傚ト (Cheung and Liu, 2004; Chau
鏡 Yu , 2 0 1 0 )
渚碓
謁嘗遮祈傘кミыЫ冩傑
傷樔Ы恠視爾ムν語乞禮球氷泣交竜垰海
奄Atal (1981)
Huang鏡Zhang (2008) 傘к萄ゲ
У悉胆状暫産己鏡晝妊部威Ч亢語彊浄向
交竜酌晝語盗軍因奄産己部威Ч亢ゑ徙
緘華χ胆状海蝉語ビ虚
祈酔始
穎爾
ア暫壜
Holliday (2000) 因傘к
ゑ休堅及儂位Ч亢交竜奄ψ位
垰海演壷サ
晝向
庶伏鏡残н玉鋭
孵妙кEsping-Andersen語Ё兩遮
晝向奄Nagpaul (1993) , Nimmagadda鏡
Cowger (1999) 傘кゑ休喩汚交竜垰海語殉獣盗軍
92
廻題檬
Singapore)cannot readily be itted into the comparative framework
designed by Esping-Andersen, which focuses more on the EuroAmerican welfare arrangement. Some studies (such as Nagpaul,
1993; Nimmagadda and Cowger, 1999)show that the philosophical basis of social work (which is an important part of social welfare), mainly drawn from Protestant ethics, Fabianism and western
middle-class individualism is irrelevant and inappropriate for the
development of social work in developing countries. To tackle these
problems, they advocate the indigenization of social science and the
development of social welfare based on indigenous knowledge (Ho
et al, 2001; Boroujerdi, 2002; Cheung and Liu, 2004).
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
暖甅
Ч獣球架箕稾Ч亢鏡華χム痘黙塑語嘗ウ
Ч亢
閉嘉覇休盗軍逆ミ揉胃傑穂埴ム胆状
匂盗覇休坦皙
獣
庵耶Ы位ヅ乞禮穂埴交竜垰海 (Ho
et al, 2001; Boroujerdi, 2002; Cheung and Liu,
2004)
許鴎
χ
殴遮祈穂淘ゑ休斌冪濡嫣爾暫
語τΜ熱慂
貢華
鋭ゑ休交竜穂埴交竜垰海語χ
曳サ棺噎姊殉獣語偽稼 (Naito and Gielen, 1992;
Secondly, studies discover that a number of commonly seen as
‘non-western’ cultural principles play an important role in shaping the
development of social welfare in different societies (Naito and Gielen,
1992; Choi and Choi, 1993; Schiele, 2000; Ho et al, 2001; Chau and Yu,
2010). Examples of these principles include African-centred principles
of the interconnectness of all things and the spiritual nature of human
beings, Confucian ideas of Ren (ル)(loving people), the Korean concept
of Cheong (human affection)and the Japanese concept of Tatemae (public
moral standards)and Honne (true inner feelings).
Choi鏡Choi, 1993; Schiele, 2000; Ho et al, 2001;
Chau鏡Yu, 2010)
赦波Υ殉柾ウ竊膀圭脆拯語貢視ムντΜ樵惚鏡
斂状索来語Ыル爾位抱
黄葦
削謁産轡鋭穂埴許交竜垰海酢暫埼
暖傑謁ヴ語乞禮語
Thirdly many governments organise social welfare based on more
than one type of knowledge. For example, a number of governments
of East Asian (such as Taiwan and Singapore)borrow the ideas from
western countries (such as the UK and the USA)when organizing social
welfare (Jones, 1993; Walker and Wong, 2005). However, at the same
time they explore the importance of the Asian values in guiding them to
organise social welfare (Chiu and Wong, 1999; Chau and Yu, 2005).
1. The outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ organise and assess social welfare based exclusively on their indigenous knowledge.
2. In organising and assessing social welfare, the outsiders of the
‘welfare state club’ do not pay attention to their indigenous
knowledge. Rather they borrow heavily from the experiences
of the insiders of the ‘welfare state club’.
奄茜臉鏡残н玉赫除胃華
χ胆状語盗軍 (奄蹴胆鏡腫胆) 球熱匸許交竜垰
海 (Jones, 1993; Walker and Wong, 2005)
酢
竒黄餌
及視嵜鋤臘鋭許熱匸交竜垰海サ因殴許殉獣
圭 (Chiu and Wong, 1999; Chau and Yu, 2005)
畊判嘉儀
So far we have discussed two views on the ethnocentric bias in the
comparative studies of social welfare. The irst stresses that the bias can
be caused by the under-emphasis on the similarities between the insiders
and outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ in organising social welfare. The
second stresses that the bias can be caused by the over-emphasis on the
similarities between the insiders and outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’
in organising social welfare. In light of these two views, it is necessary
that we avoid taking for granted that Eurocentric knowledge can be
universally applied to the analysis of social welfare in the outsiders of the
‘welfare state club’. Nor should we assume that how the outsiders of the
‘welfare state club’ organise social welfare has no relevance for the insiders. Moreover, the above two views imply that there is no more than one
way for the outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ to organise social welfare.
The following three are some of the theoretically possible ways:
覇休τΜ熱慂п撒嫣爾詫鼓柴
舷
淘酢渦殴渠埆呶威弟ムν語択亀語煮
萄ゑ埆煮舷嫣爾,殴ゑ休遮祈暫冩迂傚トゑ休濡嫣
爾暫垰海胆状鏡ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆語渦波猥
ゥ埆煮舷嫣爾
殴休遮祈冩迂傚トゑ休濡嫣爾暫垰海
胆状鏡ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆語ミ餌ャ匂
埆煮舷
萄
臘Ъ覇渠
喚勝沽燵戒冩迂傚トЫ恠視τΜ爾ムν語乞
禮語沽胃圭
因沽燵戒塊我貢垰海胆語垰海粘蚕鏡橘
休濡嫣爾暫垰海胆語垰海粘蚕語赦竈圭
黄葦
喚勝
因沽鹸柾橘休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆鋭侠玖交竜垰海酢慧
潰胃語ゲ埆ы茄χ舷
1. 埼暖傑許位ヅ語乞禮
2. 牧 殉 除 胃 ゑ 休 濡 嫣 爾 暫 垰 海 胆 語 亂 肬 嘉 ミ 鹸 殉
許位ヅ語乞禮
3. 讃暖傑許位ヅ語乞禮,ケ牧殉除胃ゑ休濡嫣爾暫垰
海胆語亂肬
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
3. The outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ organise and assess
social welfare based both on their indigenous knowledge and
the experiences of the insiders of the ‘welfare state club’.
The third theoretical possibility is particularly important in our study
of ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare. It shows
that both the attempts to underestimate the relevance of the ways in which
outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ organise social welfare compared
to the insiders, and to assume the universal application of Eurocentric
knowledge to the analysis of social welfare should be challenged. In the
following section, this possibility will be discussed in more detail with
reference to the welfare to work measures in Hong Kong and the UK.
サ熟萄ゲ嘗ы奏語杯寝
93
呶喚勝追則威弟ムν
Ыコ盃
迂
茶Ы庶伏鏡蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕爾灸
ナ
呶覇ゑ猥偖н粳訣
肱鬨嚆繍㌳
岡
架ゑィィァ艶
礇鬨
乢ゅ
咐
略ビ糯産轡盟茄謁夜略最
播菩床蚕詠勳麾絢威弗
δ傷樔交竜垰海Υ梍亮巽竒肌只絢般
覇休栂蚕
応鋭μ屹鯵侶向懲垰海瘍曳ビ会 (Labour Party
1997: 18-9)
Since 1997 the New Labour government has carried out several
New Deal programmes intended to encourage people, by stick or carrot,
to reduce their reliance on social welfare and take an active part in the
labour market (the examples include the New Deal for Young People,
the New Deal for Single Parents and the New Deal for Disabled People).
These measures are designed to get the unemployed from welfare to
work (Labour Party 1997: 18-9). In almost the same period, the Hong
Kong government has attempted to reform its social security system. It
has not only reviewed the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance
scheme (CSSA)*1 but also carried out new measures intended to help
welfare recipients take part in the job market and reduce their reliance on
social welfare (Social Welfare Department, 1998).
萄1夫
語択亀鋭垰海Ё兩遮祈ム語廂縵ε許殉獣
狩 (NEW DEAL) 重匸
The New Deal in the UK and Social Security
Reforms in Hong Kong
萄1叫
庶伏産轡因鋭蝕ミ謁餌ゑ酢夫凖
偬澗遵許交竜高屎侠崎
許ミ駕呶交竜墫永高屎
豹 絵 重 匸* 1 ( 畊 埔 墫 豹 ) 会 偖 読 涓 則
略栂蚕
燹蔦茄ゑ休
許育語暫泄絵垰海彊絵ウ殉款肌只絢般
Υ 弗 δ Я 勝 呶 交 竜 垰 海 語 傷 樔 圭 ( S o c i a l We l f a r e
Department, 1998)
傲閉
燃謁ウ嫣爾庶伏語ゑ休垰海侠崎語羅
軍 (奄瘡渤兼凧侠崎鏡恵罪侠崎) 暫淋架傑蹴胆語垰
海侠崎 (Ramesh鏡Holliday, 2001; Walker 鏡 Wong,
It is widely acknowledged that the design of some welfare systems (such as the health system and housing system)in Hong Kong
is indebted to the British welfare systems (Ramesh and Holliday,
2001; Walker and Wong, 2005; Yu, 2008). Hence, it is not surprising
to see that its social security reform has similarities with the New
Deal Programmes in the UK. Two types of the similarities will be
discussed in this section. The irst is concerned with the design of the
reform measures. The second is the messages conveyed by the two
governments about the ideal division of responsibilities between the
government and individuals in the provision of social welfare. These
messages serve to provide legitimacy to the reform measures.
2005; Yu, 2008) 穎黄庶伏語交竜高屎澗遵竒蹴胆語
略最狩重匸殴渦波ャ匂
獣殴渠χ巡
呷ミ犠爾巾
萄ゑ暫鋭傑澗遵栂蚕語重粘
泣交竜垰海酢語盗来Ζビ両軍
礇鬨咐
椀嚴
氷袋交竜高屎彊絵ウ語彊匚奏キ
喩圭語鯵侶坦皙 (Yu, 2008)
There are two key features of the reform measures in Hong
Kong. The irst is the stress on improving the employability
萄ゥ暫
鋭傑渠嘗産轡柴蒲訂絢威鎚彊殴竈嘗ウ竒産轡鋭氷
庶伏語澗遵栂蚕Ч獣殴渠嘗脆猥
The Design of the Reform Measures in Hong
Kong
許渦波猥Ч
帖抻
嘉貢騨呶偐岸蓬
庶伏産轡鋭交竜墫永高
屎豹絵重匸語涓則範骸澱慮港壱
皙
萄ゑ
姶姊キ傑巓н肌只絢般語泣沽
許鋭匂盗鯵侶坦
嘉貢澗亡肌只
1
The Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) scheme
funded by the public purse is designed to provide a safety-net
for individuals and families in need of inancial and material
assistance.
1
交竜墫永高屎豹絵重匸暫謂Γ掘σЬ語, 許重匸育語
暫爾殴亂淦孱獣語嘗ウ鏡状信氷泣演臼壅
94
廻題檬
of users of social security measures rather than structural
problems (Yu, 2008) . Evidence showing that the Hong Kong
government pays much more attention to the supply side of
the unemployment problem than to the demand side is found
in the CSSA review (Social Welfare Department, 1998: 6) :
The number of unemployment cases increased over 6 times
from 3,500 in September 1993 to 26,200 in September 1998,
representing 12% of the current total CSSA caseload. This
trend of increase has continued regardless of the economic situation……A faster growth was seen in 1995 when the unemployment rate reached a ten year high of 3.2% but the upward
trend continued unabated in 1996 and 1997 when the economy
was buoyant and the unemployment rate dropped.
This quote conveys a message that the main reason for
CSSA users failure to work and thus rely on the CSSA is not
because of shortage of jobs but because of the individual
inadequacies of the users. Hence, the government intervention
should focus on strengthening the willingness and abilities of
the unemployed to take part in the job market.
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
絢般語孱間 (Social Welfare Department, 1998: 6)
鯵侶嘗遂謂ゑィィゲ艶ィА語3,500狗
巓歌
ゑィィォ艶ィА語26,200狗
雅育
腰墫豹嘗遂澀徊語12%
竊嘗遂燹暫ミ琅巓н
サΟ歌3.2%
ト語巓碑
淦
込
巓碑决Α薯
ミ拿亂淦畝奨奄峨
ゑィィラ艶
爾ク艶球硲袋
披暫交竜墫永高
屎豹絵彊絵ウ兩窶慣批京ビ会語樵穎
般サ翫殴氷泣犠値語疆嘩
穎黄
位伏亂
駕鯵侶嘗遂ヰ殴巓蔽弗
サ熟涓則範骸猪кゑ嘗捉浸
ミ犠
鯵侶東
鯵侶嘗遂セк淘兩
京イゑィィΑ鏡ゑィィァ艶
鯵侶東コ純
覇
逆ミ鋭傑絢
嘉暫彊絵ウ語嘗ウ奏キ
産轡語ビ会Ч獣紋ム鋭氷袋鯵侶向語
ビ会羅侃鏡奏キ
腱Я勝殉款肌只絢般
萄ゥ夜語澗遵脆猥暫Ч獣竒氷泣豹絵綱語哲右
The second characteristic of the reform is that the provision of
inancial beneits to users is not based on an automatic entitlement
to citizenship, rather, it is based on users’ willingness to take up
the social obligation of improving their employability to meet the
needs of the labour market. An example is the Support for SelfReliance (SFS) scheme. Under this scheme, CSSA users under the
age of 60 are required to apply for at least two jobs per fortnight
and agree that they will not decline any job offered that he/she is
capable of doing. If CSSA users fail to fulill this condition they
may be denied inancial beneits accordingly or be required to do
community work. This condition reinforces the view that rights
and responsibilities should be balanced. Instead of focusing on
promoting the right of CSSA users to receive social welfare, more
emphasis is put on requiring them to accept their social obligation
to serve society, through inding ways to reduce their reliance on
social welfare and contributing to their community.
To further develop the SFS scheme, the Hong Kong government introduced the New Dawn project in 2006. The stated goal
of this project is to help single parents and child carers on CSSA
whose youngest child is aged 12-14 to increase their capacity for
self-help, integrate into society and move towards self-reliance
through engagement in work (Social Welfare Department, 2006b) .
It is interesting to ind that the New Dawn Project also shares the
two features of the SFS scheme. Firstly, to improve the employability of single parents and child carers, the government provides
them with personalized employment services, such as conducting
interviews with the participants regularly and providing advice
and assisting them to get up-to-date information on the labour
market and other supportive services. Secondly, an amount of
殴竈
覇哲右逆ミ暫埼暖傑彊絵向語Γ威疑迂
嘉暫埼暖傑彊絵向竜害竍羅憩曩交竜濃宇鏡澗亡
架ピ語ビ会奏キ
架キ監緯σ豹重匸
訣覇夜澗遵語ゑ嘗削園語灸ナ
諒Ыコ墫豹彊絵ウ孱獣梍亮間疆
閤暫嫖
覇重匸熱玖Αク
Я勝ミ判獣鑑
渠命硲δ遺拔渠迂ビ会
逆獣餌羅鋭冦京永揉語
ビ会酢
奄嫌墫豹彊絵ウ翫殴橢
ミы会к畦褒
苓重匸梍亮批慣ビ会
Я勝茶彫ミ京豹絵綱形暫
濡演壷ゑ休亢凧圭語交奪ビ会
缺海竒濃宇ヨ赦澹碾
覇夜哲右訣肓患
勳麾彊絵ウ弗δ傷樔交竜
垰海
爾イ盟ゑ還н帖
架キ監緯σ豹重匸
庶伏産轡鋭ゥ剽剽Α艶蔦к
語キ崎
賢朏重匸
覇嘗重匸
語呶満暫硲艶或ナド爾12歌14諒語判槃墫豹状耕鏡拠
崩苓縹向
許育語暫巓帖Я勝語架絵奏キ
Ы槓エ交竜
腱許ы
逆廃冩款エビ会Ы燿曳架キ監緯 (Social
Welfare Department, 2006b)
殴捍語暫賢朏重匸因憩
鎚イ架キ監緯σ豹重匸語渠嘗脆猥
渚碓
判槃状耕鏡拠崩苓縹向語彊匚奏キ
産轡曳Я勝氷泣
嘗ウ披侶兼凧
п撒玖夫演壷ビ会巡偬
爾イ澗亡
氷泣羅亀鏡
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
HK$200*2 will be deducted from their monthly CSSA entitlements if they refuse to sign the Job Seeker’s Undertaking or fail to
comply with any of the requirements under the New Dawn project
without good reason (Social Welfare Department, 2006c) .
凶絵Я勝桧漂肌只絢般語硲略儂捉
兼凧抱
The SFS also shares the two key features of the New Deal
for lone parents (NDLP) . First of all, the NDLP stresses
the importance of increasing the willingness and ability of
lone parents to participate in the job markets. That is why
it emphasizes both placing job-ready lone parents into paid
jobs and preparing the other lone parents so that they are
ready for entry into the labour market (Evans, 2007; Knijn
et al, 2007) . Moreover, there is evidence showing the New
Labour government attempted to link the provision of financial benefits to those users who demonstrate their willingness to take up the social obligation of improving their
employability. From March 2009 most lone parents of older
children, who claim Income Support solely on the basis of
being a lone parent, are no longer be entitled to this benefit.
Instead they are able to claim Jobseeker’s Allowance, or if
they are not well enough to work, Employment and Support
Allowance. It is important to note that in order to receive
2
HK$200 is about 16 UK pounds.
95
Υ許Я披侶σ豹
依奏幗茄賢朏重匸ヶ欝訣語宇峨ゑ夜獣間嘉ケ翫殴永
Я勝鑑А屹峡語墫豹豹絵綱
茶濡甥弗伏
2
咢ゥ下ヴ* (Social Welfare Department, 2006c)
呶奄峨偐岸揉糺披侶ウテ耕夫急樔垰海豹絵語
坦皙
庶伏産轡Γ盲港訣ы除穉蹴胆産轡語亂肬
穎黄
架キ監緯σ豹重匸竒講艶略最狩 (New Deal for
Young People) 殴渦波語詠χ
講艶略最狩育語暫凶絵
ゥクラ詫栄18歌24諒フ屹峡間疆ウテ試味硲δΑ嘗
А語講艶ウ批間ビ会Υ澗亡Я勝呶皿綮披侶語ы奏
圭 (DfEE, 1997)
匸
爾イ柬麾講艶ウ巽竒講艶略最狩重
略ビ糯産轡求胃イ播菩床蚕語交竜栂蚕
栂蚕暫爾Я勝氷泣ゑ呶ゑ語披侶羅亀兼凧
蚕暫啣摯呶皿綮畦褒永会語講艶ウ穂隙豹絵綱
播
菩
栂
覇休
栂蚕蔽圜暫懲氷Ο講艶ウ語ы狷圭球匂盗鯵侶坦皙
産轡姶姊キ氷Ο巽竒向語彊匚奏キ
…..it (NDYP) makes supply-side assumptions about skill
deficits, confidence, and the habits…..geared to ‘enhancing employability’….It requires work or training in return
for an income or allowance. Continuing entitlement to
JSA (Job Seeker’s Allowance) lapses if young people
refuse to participate, and sanctions are applied progressively if they are absent or leave early.
萄1夫
許鴎妾舟彊絵ウ畦褒磆亠間疆ウЮ憩樂水形
盗語盗謂
The Hong Kong government has openly discussed how
it can learn from the UK government’s experiences of coping with long-term dependence on social welfare (Social
Welfare Department, 1998) . Hence it is not surprising that
the SFS shared two features with the New Deal for Young
People (NDYP) . The NDYP is intended to help 250,000 1824 years old, who have been claiming Job Seeker’s Allowance for at least six months, to find work and improve their
prospects of remaining in sustained employment (DfEE,
1997) . To motivate young people to join the NDYP, the
New Labour government provides both ‘soft’ social control
measures such as one-to-one advice and ‘hard’ social control measures such as withdrawal of benefits for persistent
refusal to conform. Moreover, it is based on the supply-side
approach to unemployment. Instead of tackling a market
failure in creating unemployment, the government focuses
on enhancing participants’ employability (Halsuck, 2001) .
Fergusson (2002: 177) has written a succinct description of
these two characteristics:
萄1叫
嘉逆貢騨呶偐岸
穎絢般枉侠鯵陣慧俳汚語鯵侶坦皙 (Halsuck, 2001)
Fergusson(2002: 177)呶覇渠嘗脆猥会Ыコ畊訣語姫熟
扱 (講艶略最狩) 台粘鯵侶坦皙暫淋傑В楚ビ
会官奏
鉱ν鏡噸唏
(講艶ウ) 孱巓帖彊匚奏
キ
扱帖抻孱Ы巽нビ会形測慯球描峡奥エ形
試味
妾舟講艶ウ畦褒巽竒重匸
峡間疆ウテ試味儂椙
匸
竜徑酢鯵ъ屹
舟Я勝楚辱形氷往癰盲重
茶湶彫監笄嵋語侠幕
判槃状耕略最狩(New Deal for Lone Parents) 因虚殴
架キ監緯σ豹重匸語渠夜殉獣脆猥 渚碓 判槃状耕略
最狩帖抻氷袋判槃状耕殉款ビ会語羅鉄鏡ビ会奏キ 黄
重匸ミ駕凶絵判槃状耕巽竒殴瀑ビ会 燹偵軌Я勝会園
犠値涙縛盟エ肌只絢般(Evans, 2007; Knijn et al, 2007)
黄葦
略ビ糯因偬厶患氷泣垰海豹絵綱竒彊絵
ウ竍羅孝宿交竜濃宇Υ澗亡許彊匚奏キ柘刄鋭ゑ
2
伏咢ゥ下ヴ赦抱傑クΑ蹴惺
96
廻題檬
the Jobseeker’s allowance, applicants must be available for
and actively looking for work.
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
袖
架ゥ剽剽ィ艶ゲА袖
ト盃迂竒許艶耕ナドゑ
袖屹峡エ浸σ豹 (Income Support) 語判槃状耕
嘘道永屹峡殴竈垰海語儂椙
The Ideal Division of Responsibilities between
Individuals and Government
テ試味
舟Я勝揉永ビ会
Я勝姶奏屹峡間疆ウ
Я勝ы屹峡披侶Υσ豹
試味 (Employment and Support Allowance)
The Hong Kong government sees encouraging welfare
users to participate in the job market as a moral campaign (Chan et al, 2002) . In order to make more people
believe that unemployment can be caused by the individual
inadequacies of the unemployed, and that the unemployed
should see coping with their inadequacies as a kind of social
obligation, it actively promotes its ideas on the ideal relationship between individual and society, and the ideal division of responsibilities in the provision of social welfare
between individuals and the government. It is interesting to
find that the views of the Hong Kong government on these
issues have important similarities with that of the New Labour government.
遺拔ウ獣湶彫間疆ウテ試味
Similarly, the first Chief Executive of the Hong Kong
government, Tung Chee Wah (1997a) has stressed:
エ§
咸道鬨
economic independence.
͡
爾ゑ埆冏廈册只 (Chan et al, 2002)
爾イ腱監謁ウ赦鉱
鯵侶暫謂嘗ウ語ミ犠慧愁,ЫΥ鯵侶ウテ沽做柾澗亡架
ピ語ミ犠爾ゑ埆交竜濃宇
盗来濃宇Ζ楕
産轡愁キ氷唱峨槿嘗ウ竒
Υ鋭氷泣交竜垰海サ嘗ウ竒産轡語
庶伏産轡竒蹴胆略ビ糯産轡ミ狩嘉餌
鋭覇嘗盗来濃宇Ζ楕籀皙サ
殴姊殉獣語渦餌猥
庶伏産轡竒蹴胆略ビ糯産轡柴愁キ氷唱交亳羅
禮 (sense of community)
晦茄爾
帖抻交竜サ鑑ゑ嘩汚笑語嘗
柴竜爾許Яウ猪球廂縵
嘗ウ語茄爾暫竜廂縵交竜語
穎黄汚笑沽做訣井
逆沽做竈ν許Яウ語垰
勺
夷奄蹴胆腰渚赦Tony Blair帖抻
翫殴ヨ琵鏡厰
蓬
披翫殴濳啼
披翫殴盟還
翫殴渦餌語嵜鋤臘
披翫殴交竜 (Blair, 1993: 3-4)
餌徙詠
庶伏脆奪産轡語萄ゑ宇茄産耕矩儘埼
墨 (1997a) 因帖抻
喚勝暫殴庵獣隈綮喚勝ゑ曳鍛皿語嵜鋤臘
軍
It is important to note that the ideal community, in the
eyes of both governments, is built on a close relationship
between individuals and society. In this relationship, on the
one hand, society is assumed to have an obligation to meet
the needs of individuals – particularly in helping them cope
with poverty- via a promotion of individual participation in
the labour market. On the other hand, individuals, especially
service users, have a social obligation to work and achieve
披庵耶獣会園沽Ьビ
庶伏産轡柾勳麾垰海彊絵ウ鋭肌只絢般慣批ビ会
翫殴濃宇
….. there is a need for us to renew our commitment to the
values we hold dear. (These values are) Trust, love and respect for our family and our elders; integrity, honesty and
loyalty towards all….. an emphasis on obligations to the
community rather than rights of the individuals’ (quote
from Chiu and Wong 2005a: 15) .
駕暫
会語涙縛逆梍亮慣批ビ会
交竜語盗来竈轟
Both the Hong Kong government and the New Labour
government are keen to promote a sense of community by
emphasising that actions taken by members in society affect
each other, whereby members should be aware of the societal
impact of their individual actions and should have further
concerns for others’ well-being. For example, Tony Blair, the
former prime minister, argues that ‘without mutuality and
solidarity there will be no prosperity; without shared values
there will be no progress; without responsibility there is no
society (Blair, 1993: 3-4) .
フミ
(覇休嵜鋤臘軍暫) 獣呶状信Υ耕向殴鉱
鏡扉殉
呶慧殴ウ獣夷醐
傲呷鏡訓ν
莱
帖抻
呶交竜語濃宇謁傑嘗ウ語缺海 (懲Chiu 鏡 Wong
2005a: 15ムμ熟)
獣傘к語暫
鋭伏蹴渠嘗産轡語鐙ム
盗来語
交奪暫埼暖傑嘗ウ竒交竜語墸逐竈轟
鋭覇竈轟
ム
ε許暫廃
ゑχ巡交竜殴亢凧苓縹嘗ウ語孱獣
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
Hence, not surprisingly, the New Labour government
stresses that ‘The new contract is essentially about duty.
Duties on the part of Government are matched by duties for
individuals’ (DSS, 1998: 38-40) . Gordon Brown, Blair’s
successor, argues that ‘……we will only create lasting prosperity by ensuring that the talents of our country are fully
employed – and that rights are met with tough responsibilities that respect taxpayers as well as those claiming benefits’ (Department for Work and Pensions 2008: 8) .
Similarly, Donald Tsang (2008: 43) , the second Chief
Executive in Hong Kong expresses this view: ’We (the
government) should maintain a proper balance between our
rights and duties…… They (Hong Kong people) should also
recognize that they have a duty to our community and our
country’
The ideal division of responsibilities between individuals and the government in the provision of social welfare
upheld by the New Labour and Hong Kong governments has
significant implications for the distribution of responsibility
between individuals and the government in the provision of
social welfare. In their analysis of the concept of community
promoted by the New Labour government, Heron and Dwyer (1999: 97) highlight that the moral expectancy placed on
individuals is that in the future they will take a more active
role in providing for their own welfare needs and the government will focus on providing the basic minimum. That is
why Tony Blair stresses that active responsibility should be
at the core of welfare reform (Deacon, 2002) . This concept
is clearly explained by Gordon Brown: ‘we want everyone
who can work to work – and that means more help with
gaining skills alongside a requirement to take up these opportunities’ (Department for Work and Pensions, 2008: 5) By
doing so, he believes that the UK could ensure ‘a world-class
welfare system that maximizes the numbers in employment
and minimizes the numbers on benefits’ (Department for
Work and Pensions, 2008: 5) .
冩蔦只嘗ウ巽竒肌只絢般
挨ゑχ巡
萄1夫
97
Ы凶絵Я勝巡呶膿核
嘗ウ (ε傘兼凧彊絵ウ) 暫殴交竜濃宇ъ
ビ会鏡冓愁亂淦桍稲
穎黄
喚勝ミ窶盗偐略ビ糯産轡爾峨帖抻略
最狩暖位サ暫嘗竈傑濃宇語坦皙
嘉産轡慧憩曩
語濃宇暫爾イ楕永嘗ウ語濃宇 (DSS, 1998: 3840)
Tony Blair語簀憩ウGordon Brown因縅埔
獣高禳耕ス語濳啼
怡柴彊匚
喚勝庵耶愃高慧殴胆状語敷
庵耶愃高缺海竒濃宇ヨ赦道永
庵耶
愃高措報ウ竒垰海彊絵ウ柴彊京扉殉 (Department
for Work and Pensions 2008)
萄ゥ宇庶伏脆奪産轡茄産耕矩付懺缺 (2008:
43) 因港冓赦餓語煮舷
竒濃宇ャ耗
喚勝 (産轡) 沽做鋭缺海
壜皿ゑ嘗鮎榾語五哘
解勝 (庶伏
絢威) 因沽做訣井解勝呶喚勝語交奪鏡胆状暫殴濃
宇語
略ビ糯鏡庶伏産轡慧帖抻語嘗ウ竒産轡ャ耗語盗
来濃宇Ζ楕
呶氷泣垰海語鎖哘殴姊殉獣語貞壱
Heron 鏡 Dwyer (1999: 97) 傘к略ビ糯ミ琅帖抻嘗ウ暫
庵耶曩櫓Ч晧偽稼
噪犠架ピ語垰海孱獣
竜紋ム氷泣硲暖位語兼凧
嘉産轡姶
覇因慧槿Tony Blair帖抻梍
亮圭語垰海暫垰海澗遵語衰ν (Deacon, 2002)
Brown嘘患覇嘗両軍粳粢爾
会語庵耶ビ会
獣語官奏
The Hong Kong government has a similar view on the
distribution of responsibility between individuals and the
government in the provision of social welfare. It recognises that it has a duty to provide a final safety net for those
who cannot help themselves (Hong Kong SAR Government,
2008) . However, at the same time, it stresses that it would
not attempt to narrow the wealth gap by redistributing wealth
through a high level provision of welfare because it is afraid
that this measure would undermine people’s incentive to
work. Hence not surprisingly the Hong Kong government
concentrates on assisting people to take part in the job market through the provision of education and training (Hong
Kong SAR Government, 2008) . It argues that low pay is
萄1叫
Gordon
喚勝蒲訂鑑嘗ウыЫビ
覇因б港爾ウ勝氷泣Η永呷屓ビ会孱
腱Я勝ыЫ患漂彊匚語枉竜
for Work and Pensions, 2008: 5)
(Department
Я赦鉱覇休演壷ы
Ы高禳蹴胆彫京ゑ嘗У悉塑語垰海侠崎
Ы冓愁硲
謁ウ披侶Υ硲δウ鎚彊垰海 (Department for Work and
Pensions, 2008: 5)
庶伏産轡鋭氷泣交竜呶嘗ウ竒産轡語濃宇Ζビセ
殴赦餌語煮舷
扱嫣爾産轡暫殴濃宇爾ミ奏架絵向氷
泣硲柵語演臼壅 (Hong Kong SAR Government, 2008)
閉嘉竒黄餌酢
扱帖抻ミ沽偬厶Ы袋崎氷泣交竜垰海
98
廻題檬
better than no pay and the CSSA should be seen as the last
resort (Social Welfare Department, 1998) .
Certainly the two governments’ shared ideas on the ideal
division of responsibilities between individuals and the
government in the provision of social welfare provide moral
support to their welfare-to-work measures. These measures
could be seen as a method to help people reduce their individual inadequacies by contributing to their community
through active participation in training programmes and job
market.
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
球殉略Ζ楕続庇
逆Ы黄奥遷続庇筧寸
爾黄瀋竜漉唇ビ会羅鉄
軌鏡疆侶談測
穎黄ミ窶盗偐扱愁キ氷泣偵
Ы紋ム凶絵ウ勝殉款肌只絢般 (Hong
扱帖抻塊奥エ澀Ё翫
Kong SAR Government, 2008)
殴奥エ園
嘉墫永豹絵因姶沽濡柾爾偐岸坦皙語硲柵
π糸 (Social Welfare Department, 1998)
蔽ы于圜
渠嘗産轡鋭氷泣交竜垰海サ
竒産轡語盗来濃宇Ζ楕語渦餌盗軍
The Role of Traditional Values
穎爾扱嫣
ビ会語栂蚕氷泣冏廈語暖甅
呶嘗ウ
爾許懲垰海瘍曳
覇休栂蚕ыЫ濡柾爾ゑ
埆泄絵ウ勝匂盗許嘗ウミ犠語χ舷
At the same time as striving to develop Hong Kong into a
global city, the Hong Kong government is keen to associate
its rule with traditional Chinese values. For example, Tung
Chee Wah emphasizes that: ‘We need to continue to preserve
the virtues of Chinese culture while at the same time assimilating the knowledge and experience of the West….’ (quote
from Chiu and Wong, 2005: 15) . Moreover, achieving social
harmony (a traditional Chinese idea) is stressed by the Hong
Kong government as an important political goal. In the 1997
Policy Address, Tung Chee Wah (1997b) stresses that social
harmony is an important moral value that the community at
large should treasure. Donald Tsang (2007) emphasizes that
social harmony should be seen as an important guide when
formulating public policies.
It is important to note that welfare system is not an independent system. It is highly related to other systems such
as political and economic (Esping-Andersen, 1990; Walker
and Wong, 2005) . Unlike the UK government, Hong Kong
government is not a democratic government. It is not chosen
through an election based on the universal suffrage. There
are a lot of voices for accelerating the political reform so as
to transform the Hong Kong government into a democratic
government. Facing this political pressure, it is no surprise
that the Hong Kong government makes use of traditional
values not only to provide support to its welfare to work
measures but also to reduce people’s expectations on political reforms (Chiu and Wong, 1999; Chiu and Wong, 2005a;
2005b; Chau and Yu, 2005; Yu, 2008) . There are two reasons
for supporting this view.
ν﨏ёノ
庇鬨
櫓庶伏産轡愁キ患庶伏穂埴汚爾ゑ嘗臼棟挫
絢語餌酢
因悍Η詠患許埣己竒ム胆油督嵜鋤臘
軍赦琶墸甥
灸奄
華χ乞禮鏡亂肬語餌酢
Μ語腫廈
熟)
櫓喚勝蛙峡
因孱獣簀綮高怨ム墨τ
(懲Chiu 鏡 Wong, 2005a: 15ムμ
黄葦
庶伏産轡ゑ醐柾冓愁交竜鏡槞 (ゑ嘗
ム胆油督嵜鋤臘軍) 爾許硲殉獣語産己育徼
ゑィィァ艶蚕産範骸ム
長
鋭
儘埼墨 (1997b) 帖抻交
竜鏡槞暫ゑ嘗殉獣語冏廈嵜鋤
曵嘗交竜沽做七
付懺缺 (2007) 因殉遺交竜鏡槞沽濡柾爾侠玖
Γ渦産捧酢語ゑ嘗殉獣語傘μ
殉獣傘к語暫
季督
垰海侠崎逆ミ暫ゑ嘗桍稲語
扱竒許Я侠崎 (奄産己鏡亂淦) 暫浸浸赦
竈 語 ( E s p i n g - A n d e r s e n , 1 9 9 0 ; Wa l k e r 鏡 Wo n g ,
2005)
竒蹴胆産轡ミ餌語暫
ゑ嘗謂醐橦慧痘緯語威Ч産轡
処獣間н刊産己澗遵
ゑ嘗威Ч産轡
Firstly, by associating the traditional values with its rule,
the Hong Kong government attempts to convince the public
to accept the importance of bearing social obligations. Tung
Chee Wah has reminded Hong Kong people to equip themselves with ‘the ability to differentiate and strike a balance
between personal freedom and the rule of law; rights and
儘埼墨帖抻
硬艶殴ミδ澡
Ы厶患庶伏産轡瘍聹爾
巡呶覇埆産己汕キ
厶海胃油督嵜鋤臘軍
会緘掃
庶伏産轡逆ミ暫
庶伏産轡雨
爾許懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕
逆弗塊絢威呶産己澗遵語夫訂 (Chiu 鏡
Wong, 1999; Chiu鏡Wong, 2005a; 2005b; Chau
鏡 Yu, 2005; Yu, 2008)
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
obligations; self-interest and social good as a whole’(quote
from Chiu and Wong, 2005a: 21) . Moreover, he points out
that to tackle social problems and improve people’s quality
of life, it is necessary to stress social responsibilities rather
than fighting for rights. This implies that he believes that
promoting democracy and political rights are less important
and less pragmatic than bearing social obligations. Tung’s
view on these issues are shown in the following quote:
…..I consider that fulilment of obligations and acceptance
of responsibilities, in this context, should be more important
than pursuit of their rights. This does not simply concern the
right way to enhance self-accomplishment, develop one’s
potentials, and make one’s dream more true. More importantly, it is to create an atmosphere and promote an attitude
渚碓
This point is shown by Tung’s view on social harmony:
嘗ウ海蝉竒ト透海蝉語鮎榾 (懲Chiu
鏡 Wong, 2005a: 21ムμ熟)
黄葦
Я監傘к鋭
匂盗交竜坦皙鏡澗亡ウ威語緯雌禅拯酢
喚勝沽
帖抻交竜濃宇
覇肓壱
ミ沽判判爾イ跨峡缺海
кЯ赦鉱憩曩交竜亢凧暫孵Ё氷唱威Ч鏡産己缺
海殉獣鏡虚呷屓嵜鋤
Ыコ暫肓壱儘埼墨語煮舷
語又曄
鋭覇嘗渟雙コ
喚嫣爾幗茄亢凧鏡憩恢濃
宇沽Ё詑間Я勝語缺海監爾殉獣
覇ミ判姶暫
廛廣峨槿夷愃杯寝Ы巓盟嘗ウ汚披
恁奏Υ茶吁来呷淘
監殉獣語暫
穂埴嘗ウ
奄峨鋭位詠
交奪婢俳畝顕鏡氷唱夷愃語哘崎鏡緯凝キ
疥
Ы噪羅詠偐岸庶伏Υ鋭講艶ウム怨鋭語ミ鷹貯
坦皙 (懲Chiu鏡 Wong, 2005b: 82ムμ熟)
許鴎
庶伏産轡凖偬患交竜鏡槞語両軍琶碾傑
(helping people to help themselves) 語両
絵ウ架絵
軍
付懺缺 (2007) 帖抻爾イ呷淘交竜鏡槞語両軍
轡ミ沽偬厶Ы袋報奥鏡垰海球殉略Ζ楕続庇
続庇筧寸
赦Φ
産
逆奥遷
産轡語偽稼沽準傑櫨俳泄絵塊奥エ
ウЮ澗亡緯雌語交竜哲右
塊奥エ状信語彊匚奏キ
監殉獣語暫
爾帖Μ
産轡柾澗亡
絵ウ架絵
語両軍
語殉獣π糸
逆疥Ы鴻盟交竜鏡槞 (Tsang, 2007)
彫鹸羅語暫
産轡語姊鐙猥暫患交竜鏡槞琶碾傑槨僂
嘉ミ鋭暖傑橦瀋語威Ч産侠
鋤
覇猥ы懲儘呶交
竜鏡槞語煮舷ム煮京
喚赦鉱ト状背墳訂殴ゑ嘗ト餌語交竜
嘗ウ背扉殉鏡亡咋呶χ
廈
灸奄恰冏
餌槨僂
酢
This quotes together with the stress on the idea of helping people to help themselves implies that the public is
expected to fulfil social obligations through improving their
employability, accept the consultation system rather than demanding more welfare and greater democratic element (such
99
儘埼墨氷檍庶伏絢威孱獣們縛架ピ
缺海竒亢凧
侠崎
I believe we all desire a society of greater harmony, in
which everybody respects and treats others well. We
should carry forward our traditional virtues, such as filial
piety, humanity, importance attached to education, and
diligence. We favour consultation, not confrontation.
We seek protection of the rights of the individual, yet
we should also fulfil social responsibility and obligations (quote from Chiu and Wong, 2005b: 85) .
萄1夫
腱架ピ殴奏キΖ橸鏡泗彫会к嘗ウ架謂竒舷己
of correctness and vitality in the local community, thereby
resolving satisfactorily the unhealthy problems prevailing
in Hong Kong and among the youth (quote from Chiu and
Wong, 2005: 82) .
Secondly, the Hong Kong government tries to link the
concept of social harmony to the concept of ‘helping people
to help themselves’. Donald Tsang (2007) argues that in order to realize the concept of social harmony, the government
should not attempt to narrow the wealth gap by redistributing wealth through high levels of tax and welfare. Instead
the role of the government should be confined to creating
the social conditions that help improve the livelihood of
people with low income. Most importantly, the government
sees improving the employability of low income group as an
important means for strengthening the concept of ‘helping
people to help themselves’, and thus for enhancing social
harmony (Tsang, 2007) . It is also necessary to note the government’s attempt to link social harmony to the consultative
system rather than the democratic system based on election.
萄1叫
ウ冏
ミ閥姦跨
鋭覇倆鑑
喚勝沽做憩油油督語腫
殉柾軌ウ鏡揖晉
喚勝秡
喚勝批間高緘嘗ウ缺海語餌
因沽幗茄交竜濃宇鏡亢凧 (懲 Chiu 鏡 Wong,
2005b: 85ムμ熟)
覇嘗μ熟鋭帖抻絵ウ架絵語来舷
訣肓詠羅
怯姊Γ透暫盗沽澗亡架ピ語彊匚奏キ
Ы幗茄許
100
廻題檬
as putting emphasis on confrontation and recognition of the
value of the opposition parties) .
Analysts argue that the New Deal programmes in the
UK are associated with some value-laden concepts, such
as Macmurray’s Interconnected Communities, Etzioni’s
Moral Community and Hutton’s Active Welfare State (Blair,
1996; Heron and Dwyer, 1999; Deacon, 2002) . Despite the
debates on the meanings of these concepts and their contribution to the formulation of the New Deal programmes in
the UK, these concepts at least potentially could convince
the public to take more social obligations, to find ways to
meet their own welfare needs, to reduce their reliance on the
government, and to take part in the labour market. Despite
the fact that the Hong Kong government borrows the ideas
of the New Deal programmes in the UK, there is no sign that
it attempts to make use of these concepts in place of Chinese
traditional values to provide legitimacy to its social security
measures. A possible reason is that these values are not as effective as the traditional Chinese ideas such as social harmony in legitimatizing the undemocratic system. This suggests
that the Hong Kong government adopts a double-connection
strategy in developing and implementing the social security
reform measures – attaching to the ideas of the New Deal
programmes and the Chinese traditional values at the same
time. Tung Chee Wah makes its keenness to adopt this strategy explicit by pointing out that Hong Kong has embraced
the eastern and western cultures and the government will
continue to encourage diversity in Hong Kong (Chiu and
Wong, 2005a; 2005b) .
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
交竜亢凧
鎚措槨僂侠崎嘉ミ沽繍間監謁語垰海
鏡威Чヴ禅 (奄姊殉姦跨鏡嫣餌Φ呶糯語嵜鋤)
殴Ζ研笑縅埔蹴胆語略最狩重匸暫琶碾傑謁
嘗砥幎語嵜鋤臘軍
赦澹碾交奪
奄Macmurray慧遮祈語
Etzioni慧氷唱語
Hutton 慧ヲ篤語
冏廈交奪
梍亮垰海胆
狆閉ミ
餌ウ呶覇休両軍語玖亢鏡殉獣圭殴ミ餌語嫖舷
駕暫ト謁徊ウ柴餌羅覇休両軍虚縛嫖兼Γ透憩曩
交竜亢凧
宿濃噪犠架ピ語垰海孱獣
弗δ呶産
轡語傷樔Υ巽竒肌只絢般抱語恁鋭о奏
斃埣
庶伏産轡除羣傑蹴胆語略最狩重匸語盗軍
駕翫
殴儷満肓壱庶伏産轡偬厶Ы覇休両軍球峡бム胆
油督嵜鋤臘軍
Ы爾許交竜高屎栂蚕会緘掃
庶
伏産轡峡ム釣華語許ムゑ嘗樵穎暫覇休華χ両軍
逆ミ奄ム胆油督嵜鋤臘軍 (奄交竜鏡槞) 橘操殴
陣詠σ豹貢威Ч産胥
肓嘉潔亀
埴 鏡蔦茄交竜高屎澗遵栂蚕酢
庶伏産轡鋭穂
潰胃ゑ嘗癶塾捧
祷 (double-connection strategy)
階鋭餌ゑ酢
耗潰胃蹴胆略最狩重匸語盗軍鏡ム胆油督語嵜鋤
儘埼墨監港訣許呶潰胃覇嘗捧祷語羅竍
Я傘к庶伏暫獣п譲堅χ鏡華χ語τΜ
Having discussed the similarities of the welfare to work
measures in Hong Kong and the New Deal programmes in
the UK, and the two governments’ ideas on the ideal relationship between society and individuals, and the division
of the government and individuals in the provision of social
welfare, this part focuses on examining how this study contributes to the analysis of the two views on the ethnocentric
bias in the comparative studies of social welfare.
鏡
( B l a i r, 1 9 9 6 ;
H e r o n 鏡 D w y e r, 1 9 9 9 ; D e a c o n , 2 0 0 2 )
臘軍
The Implications for the Examination of
Ethnocentricism in the Comparative Studies of
Social Welfare
ヨ
嘉産轡
因 獣 簀 綮 勳 麾 庶 伏 謁 ヴ Μ 語 穂 埴 ( C h i u 鏡 Wo n g ,
2005a; 2005b)
榻㊠潸囹々叛
降麵衛湍
⑤㍉々鬨緊簞
腰τフ呶庶伏鏡蹴胆語懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕語
赦餌ャ匂
盗来語嘗ウ竒交竜竈轟
鋭氷泣交竜垰海語濃宇Ζ楕
Υ嘗ウ竒産轡
会к偖読語則拿
位
盃迂紋ム涓柾覇嘗遮祈奄峨巓盟喚勝呶威弟ムν語
As mentioned above, to avoid the potential bias of excluding social welfare in the outsiders of the ‘welfare state
club’ in the comparative studies, it is necessary to avoid
over-emphasizing the differences between the ways in which
social welfare is organized by the insiders and outsiders of
the ‘welfare state club’. This suggestion obviously garners
support from the above discussion of the mutual relevance
択亀語盗偐
奄サτ氷Υ
爾イ燵戒鋭Ё兩遮祈ム
患ゑ
休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆畦抃傑交竜垰海語則拿語考
葦
喚勝暫殴孱獣燵戒傚ト貢垰海胆状竒ゑ休濡
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
of the social security reform measures in Hong Kong and the
New Deal programmes in the UK.
As also indicated above, criticisms of the ethnocentric
bias in the comparative studies of social welfare, show the
importance of not only avoiding an over-estimation of the
applicability of Eurocentric knowledge, but also the need to
recognise that the outsiders of ‘welfare state club’ may try to
organize social welfare based on their indigenous knowledge.
As shown above, in promoting social security measures, the
Hong Kong government is keen to show their links to traditional Chinese values. This suggests that it is aware that
the acceptability of these programmes will be increased if it
can demonstrate that these programmes are underpinned by
Chinese traditional values.
The third point this paper is intended to highlight is
the attempts of the outsiders of the ‘welfare state club’ to
relate their policy proposals to both the policy ideas of
other governments and their indigenous knowledge at the
same time. This kind of double connection strategy is also
found in the ways the Hong Kong government promotes
and develops its social security reform measures. Studies
indicate that the Hong Kong government’s attempt to link to
‘two worlds’ is not without reason or exceptional. Analysts
argue that to seek support to their reforms, it is not unusual
for policy leaders to appeal to the shared values (March and
Olsen, 1989; Cox, 2004) . Moreover, the Hong Kong government is not the only administration in Chinese societies
to use double connection strategy to respond to different
sources of ideas. The administrations in traditional China
had a long history of allowing people to use both traditional
Chinese medicines and Indian medicines to promote their
health (Chau and Yu, 2010) . Another important example
is the Self-Strengthening Movement practised in the Ching Dynasty. In the early 19th Century, western countries
unremittingly pressed for an expansion of trade with China.
Facing these pressures, many Chinese officials were at first
skeptical about western culture and advocated restricting
the activity of westerners in China. However, after losing
the two Opium Wars to Britain (respectively in 1841 and
1858) , some officials thought that western knowledge could
be used to strengthen China and the Confucian order. As a
result, they attempted to acquire western knowledge under
the campaign commonly known as the Self-Strengthening
Movement (Hsu, 1995) . In order to convince the public
that Western culture could strengthen Confucianism, they
presented the Ti and Yung theory, arguing that Ti means substance and Yung means application, further characterising
Chinese learning as the Ti and western learning as the Yung,
under the slogan that Chinese learning is the substance and
Western learning is for use.
嫣爾暫垰海胆語ミ餌ャ匂
萄1叫
萄1夫
101
覇臘猥サ訣肓詠懲サ
熟殴竈庶伏語交竜高屎澗遵栂蚕竒蹴胆語略最狩
重匸語則拿ム彫京σ皿
サτ肓壱
禮語沽胃圭
喚勝沽燵戒冩迂傚ト恠視爾ムν語乞
逆獣鹸羅ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆状暫竜
Ы許位ヅ語乞禮
会爾捧匸氷泣交竜垰海語暖甅
覇
臘猥訣肓詠懲サ熟則拿殴竈庶伏産轡呶ム胆油督嵜鋤
臘軍語殉柾呆崎彫京σ皿
挨ゑ猥鋤彫鹸羅語暫
ゑ休濡嫣爾暫貢垰海胆ミ
駕竜除羣許Я産轡語蚕産盗軍
竒黄餌酢因竜柾位ヅ
語乞禮爾埼稲産捧語盗拿暖甅
覇嘗癶塾捧祷因ы懲
庶伏産轡奄峨蔦茄許交竜高屎栂蚕彫京μ禳
轡潰措癶塾捧祷
逆ミ暫翫殴冏盗語
傑兩譲潔峡彫嫣彊圭
庶伏産
殴晝向傘к謂
産捧屹晧向諭曳患産捧埼暖
傑ト透嫣餌語嵜鋤臘軍逆ミ犠爾巾 (March 鏡 Olsen,
1989; Cox, 2004)
黄葦
庶伏産轡逆ミ暫探ゑ潰胃癶
塾捧祷語墨ウ産轡
ム胆ь酢フ詩茄餌酢潰胃油督ム
胆瘡
Ы鴻盟鷹貯 (Chau 鏡 Yu, 2010)
鏡云崎瘡
澱婦酢夫蔦茄語架帖册只暫挨ゑ殉獣語灸禳
クィУ
手浩
華χ胆状ミ琅獣間鋭ム胆珎埴蓑潔
汕キ
ミδム胆矩笑背呶華χτΜ芸殴睾圜哘崎
勳浬準侠華χウЮ鋭ム胆語雌只
巡呶覇休
逆
閉嘉
架敕Н暝跨
剃с柵 (Ζ晦傑ゑォ渥ゑΥゑォラォ艶)
殴休矩笑盲
襟嫣爾華χ語乞禮形ыЫ巓帖斂状索来鏡進楾ム胆
穎黄
Я勝閤蔦茄
架帖册只
兼Γ透鎚彊華χτΜ
胃
(Hsu, 1995)
爾イ嫖
ム晝爾胥
華晝爾
Я勝氷к
語両軍
癶塾捧祷語則拿ы鴻盟喚勝イ偐ゑ休濡嫣爾暫
貢垰海胆奄峨頴沽垰海胆語亂肬
渚碓
扱勝逆ミ
ゑ玖竜臼慍鎚彊形暫臼慍Φ呶垰海胆語亂肬
ы奏餌酢潰措盃迂葦球乞禮鏡位ヅ乞禮
耕母
櫓閉覇埆癶塾捧祷語虚胥港淘
竈語産己
轡慧墜侠
亂淦鏡交竜穎禅慧廂縵
扱勝
ヨ俾渠向
暫竜彊京赦
嘉貢滑臼爾産
102
廻題檬
Conclusion
This paper has discussed how the welfare to work measures
in Hong Kong are similar to the New Deal programmes in the
UK, and the implications of the analysis of these similarities for
the examination of the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare. In this concluding part, it is worth suggesting a new agenda for further research projects on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative study of social welfare. The paper
has focused on studying how the government organises social
welfare and makes use of different value-laden concepts to give
legitimacy to its social welfare measures. However, it is important to avoid ignoring the roles of the public in organising social
welfare and judging value-laden concepts. In fact, members of
the public in Hong Kong do not necessarily accept the government’s views on Chinese traditional values, the ideal relationship
between individuals and society, or the ideal division of responsibilities between individuals and governments in the provision
of social welfare. Moreover, there may be a lack of consensus
on these issues among themselves. Hence, it is worth examining
these issues in the next project, as that can provide a better understanding of the importance of the similarities and differences
between the social security reform measures in Hong Kong and
the New Deal programmes in the UK from the perspectives of
their respective publics. The attempts to do so may gain more
insights into the the examination of the ethnocentric bias in the
comparative studies of social welfare.
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
皂冾
位τ則拿イ庶伏懲垰海瘍曳ビ会栂蚕奄峨竒蹴胆
語略最狩重匸語赦餌ャ匂
逆Ζ研覇則拿奄峨巓盟喚
勝呶威弟ムν語択亀語盗偐
球遮祈語籀皙
鋤臘
位τ語澀蓬紋ム則拿依
狆閉腰τ紋ム則拿蚕産向語捧祷鏡嵜
駕暫喚勝褒ミ沽群柾Γ透鋭氷泣交竜垰海Υ則
拿嵜鋤臘軍サ慧棺噎語偽稼
仇呷サ
蹴胆鏡庶伏絢
威逆ミゑ玖嫣餌許産轡呶ゑ休籀皙語煮舷
督嵜鋤臘軍語僖粢
覇п撒油
嘗ウ竒交竜語盗来竈轟
嘗ウ竒
産轡鋭氷泣交竜垰海サ語盗来濃宇Ζ楕抱
ミ駕奄
黄
ト透呶覇休籀皙因ミゑ玖竜峡彫渦禮
穎黄
祈
拍庶伏鏡蹴胆語絢威奄峨盗偐渠詠交竜高屎語筒餌
暫鋤彫追則語籀皙
ムν語択亀
赦竈語則拿茶в喚勝謁イ偐威弟
澹永笨悠拿晏 2012艶賛区
References 巽可τ箒
Atal, Y. (1981) . The Call for Indigenization. International Social
Science Journal, 33(10) , 189-97.
Blair, T. (1993) . Extract of Speech given by Tony Blair MP
to Wellingborough Constituency Party 3 March (News
Release) , The Labour Party, London.
Blair, T. (1996) . New Britain: My Vision of a Young Country.
London, England: Fourth Estate.
Boroujerdi, M. (2002) . Subduing Globalization: The
Challenge of the Indigenization Movement. In R.
Grant and J. R. Short (Eds.) , Globalization and
the Margins (pp. 39-49) , New York, NY: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Chan, Y., Ho, L.Y., Tsang, C.H., and Yu, S, (2002) . Social
and Public Policy Analysis: Guide and Practice.
Hong Kong, China: Division of Social Studies, City
University of Hong Kong.
Chau, C. M. and Yu, W. K. (2005) , Is welfare unAsian?.
In A. Walker and C. K. Wong (Eds.) , East Asian
Welfare Regimes in Transition: From Confucianism
to Globalization (pp. 21-45) . Bristol, England: The
Policy Press.
Chau, C. M. and Yu, W. K. (2009) . Social Quality and the
Social Harmony Campaign in Hong Kong. Development and society, 38 (2) , 277-95.
Chau, C. M. and Yu, W. K. (2010) . The Sensitivity of United
Kingdom Health-care Services to the Diverse Needs of
Chinese-origin Older People. Ageing and Society, 30,
383-401.
Cheung, M. and Liu, M. (2004) . The Self-Concept of
Chinese Women and the Indigenization of Social Work.
International Social Work, 47 (1) , 109-27.
Chiu, S. and Wong, V. (1999) . Confucian welfare: A
new legitimation for social welfare in Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region. In B. Lesnik (Ed.) ,
International perspectives in Social Work: Social Work
and the State (pp.75-86) , London, England: Pavilion.
Chiu, S. and Wong, V. (2005a) . Towards a confucian notion
of youth development in Hong Kong. International
Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 25 (10/11) , 14
-36.
Chiu, S. and Wong, V. (2005b) . Hong Kong: from famlistic
to Confucian welfare. In A. Walker, and C. K.
Wong (Eds.) , East Asian welfare regimes in transition (pp. 73-93) , Hong Kong, England: The Policy
Press.
Choi, S. Y., Kim, U. and Choi, S. H. (1993)Indigenous Analysis of
Collective Representations: A Lorean Perspective. In U. Kim
and J. W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous Pyschologies: Research and
Experience in Cultural Context (pp. 193-210), Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
萄1叫
萄1夫
103
Clasen, J. and Clegg, D. (2003) . Unemployment Protection and
Labour Market Reform in France and Great Britain, in
the 1990s: Solidarity Versus Activation. Journal of Social
Policy, 32(3) , 361-81.
Cox, R. (2004) . The path-dependency of an idea: why
Scandinavian welfare states remain distinct. Social Policy
and Administration, 28 (2) , 204-19.
Deacon, A. (2002)Perspectives on welfare: ideas, ideologies, and
policy debates, Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
De Giorgi, G. (2005) . The New Deal for Young People Five
Years On. Fiscal Studies, 26 (3) , 371-83.
Department for Work and Pensions (2008) . No one written
off: Reforming welfare to reward responsibility.
Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State
for Work and Pensions by command of Her Majesty,
Retrieved November 15, 2008, from http://dwp.gov.
uk/welfarereform/noonewrittenoff/noonewrittenoffcomplete.pdf
Department for Education and Employment (1997) . Design
of the New Deal for 18-24 Year Olds. London,
England: Author.
Department of Social Security (1998) . New Ambitions for
Our Country: A New Contract for Welfare. London,
England.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) . The Three Worlds of Welfare
Capitalism. London, England: Polity Press.
Evans, P. (2007) . Taking account of precarious employment:
Workfare policies & lone mothers in Ontario and the
UK. Social Policy & Administration, 41 (1) , 27 -49.
Fergusson, R. (2002) . Rethinking youth transitions: Policy
transfer and new exclusions in New Labour’s New Deal.
Policy Studies, 23 (3) ,173-90.
Gough, I. (1979) . The political economy of the welfare state.
London, England : Macmillan.
Graham, M. (1999) . The African-centred worldview:
Developing a paradigm for social work. British Journal
of Social Work, 29 (2) , 252 -67.
Grover, C. and Stewart, J. (1999). Market Workfare: Social Security,
Social Regulation and Competitiveness in the 1990s. Journal
of Social Policy, 28(1), 73-6.
Halsuck, C. (2001). Lessons from the new deal: inding work,
promoting employability. New Economy, 8(4), 230-4.
Heron, E. and Dwyer, P. (1999) . Doing the right thing:
Labour’s attempt to forge a new welfare deal between
the individual and the State. Social Policy and
Administration, 33 (1) , 91-104.
Hill, M. (2006) . Social policy in the modern world: A
comparative text. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Ho, D., Peng, S.Q, Lai, A. and Chan, S.F. (2001) . Indigenization
and Beyond: Methodological Relationalism in the Study
of Personality across Cultural Traditions. Journal of
Personality, 69 (6) , 926-53.
104
廻題檬
Holliday, I. (2000). Productivist Welfare Capitalism: Social Policy
in East Asia. Political Studies, 48: 706-23.
Hong Kong SAR Government (2008) . The 2008-09 Budget,
Speech by the financial Secretary. Hong Kong, China:
Government Printer.
Hsu, C. Y. (1995) . The rise of modern China. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Huang, Y. N. and Zhang, X. (2008) . A Reflection on the
Indigenization Discourse in Social Work. International
Social Work, 51: 611-22.
Jones, C. (Ed.) (1993) . New Perspectives in the Welfare State in
Europe. London, England: Routledge.
Kennett, P. (2001) . Comparative social policy. Buckingham,
England: Open University Press.
Knijn, T., Martin, C. and Millar, J. (2007) . Activation as a
common framework for social policies towards lone
parents. Social Policy and Administration, 41 (6) , 63852.
Labour Party (1997) . Labour because Britain deserves
better. London, England: Labour Party.
March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1989) . Rediscovering
Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New
York, NY: Free Press.
Millar, J. (2000) . Lone Parents and the New Deal. Policy
Studies, 21 (4) , 333-45.
Nagpaul, H (1993) . Analysis of Social Work Teaching
Material in India: The Need for Indigenous Foundations.
International Social Work, 36: 207-20.
Naito, T. and Gielen, U. P. (1992) . Tatemae and hone:
A study of moral relativism in Japanese culture. In
U.P. Gielen, L. L. Ader, and N. A. Milgram (Eds.) ,
Psychology in International Perspective (pp. 161172) . Amsterdam, Holand: Swets and Zeitlinger.
Nimmagadda, J. and Cowger, C. (1999) . Cross-Cultural
Practice: Social Worker Ingenuity in the Indigenization
of Practice Knowledge. International Social Work, 42 (3) ,
261-76.
Offe, C. (1984) . Contradictions of the welfare state John
Keane, (Ed.) . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Payne, M. (2005) . Modern Social Work Theory. New York,
NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Prideaux, S. (2001) . New Labour, Old Functionalism: The
Underlying Contradictions of Welfare Reform in the
US and the UK. Social Policy and Administration,
35 (10) , 85-115.
Ramesh, M. and Holliday, I. (2001) . The health care miracle in
East and Southeast Asia: Activist state provision in Hong
Kong, Malyasia and Singapore. Journal of Social Policy,
30 (4) , 637-51.
Schiele, J. (2000) . Human Services and the Afrocentric
Paradigm. London, England: The Haworth Press.
Social Welfare Department (1998). Report on review of the
Welfare to Work Measures in Hong Kong and the UK
comprehensive social security assistance scheme - December
1998. Hong Kong, China: Government Printer.
Social Welfare Department (2006a) . New Dawn Project – Enhancing Self-Help, Integrating into Society and Setting
Up a Good Model for Your Children. Retrieved April
20, 2006, from http://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/site_
thematic/#58,1.
Social Welfare Department (2006b) . Comprehensive social
security assistance (CSSA) scheme. Retrieved November
9, 2006, from http://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/site_
pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_comprehens/index.html
Social Welfare Department (2006c) . New dawn project
– Enhancing self-help, integrating into society and
setting up a good model for your children. Retrieved
April 1, 2006, from http://www.swd.gov.hk/en/index/
site_thematic/#58.
Tang, K. L. and Cheung, C. (2007) . Programme effectiveness
in activating welfare recipients to work: The case of
Hong Kong. Social Policy & Administration, 42 (7) ,
747-67.
Tsang, D. Y. K. (2007) . The Policy Address 2007. Hong
Kong, China: Government Printer.
Tsang, D. Y. K. (2008) . The policy address 2008. Hong Kong,
China: Government Printer.
Tung, C. H. (1997a) . Speech at the Asia society annual
dinner on 15 May 1997.
Tung, C. H. (1997b), The Policy Address 1997. Hong Kong, China:
Government Printer.
Walker, A. and Wong, C. K. (1996). Rethinking the western
construction of the welfare state. International Journal of
Health Services, 26(1), 67-92.
Walker, A. and Wong, C. K. (2004). The ethnocentric construction
of the welfare state. In Kennett, P. (Ed.), A handbook of
comparative social policy (pp. 116-50). Cheltenham, England:
Edward Elgar.
Walker, A. and Wong, C. K. (2005). Introduction: East Asian welfare
regimes. In A. Walker, and C. K. Wong (Eds.), East Asian
welfare regimes in transition (pp. 3-20). Hong Kong, China:
The Policy Press.
Walker, A. and Wong, C. K. (2009). The Relationship between
Social Policy and Economic Policy: Constructing the Public
Burden of Welfare in China and the West. Development and
Society, 38(1), 1-26.
Wong. C. K. (2009) . Comparing social quality and social
harmony from a governance perspective. Development
and society, 38 (2) , 237-57.
Yu, W. K. (2008). The Normative Ideas Underpinning the Welfare
to Work Measures for Young People in Hong Kong and the
UK. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy,
28(9/10), 380-93.